Forum:Changes
21:00, December 3, 2013 (UTC) ---- *'Support' adoption of new forums. I personally think this is a good idea and will boost the ability to discuss and make decisions. - 21:00, December 3, 2013 (UTC) *'Support' -- 21:06, December 3, 2013 (UTC) *'Support' - Per Bond's views. 21:08, December 3, 2013 (UTC) *'Support' - I agree, seems like this will better lend itself to discussions. ' ArrowTwoActual'Talk 22:13, December 3, 2013 (UTC) *'Support' -- Per the above Is this even something that can be customized? Юра15px|link=User talk:YuriKaslov 22:48, December 3, 2013 (UTC) There appears to be a consensus in favour of this. If there are no more objections, I will implement the new forums on an ongoing trial basis tomorrow - 17:40, December 7, 2013 (UTC) User Talk Pages Like the forums, user talk pages require each page to be edited to take part in a discussion. A newer feature from Wikia is the message wall system - which is very similar in layout to blog comments, with the ability to post and directly reply to threaded comments, as well as vote up other people's comments. This is the default for new wikis. Making use of this feature should massively boost participation in discussions between users, make the business of running the site smoother. If these new forums are adopted, current talk pages will be automatically archived - still visible but no longer editable. - 21:00, December 3, 2013 (UTC) ---- *'Support' adoption of message walls. I personally think this is a good idea and will boost the ability to have discussions. - 21:00, December 3, 2013 (UTC) *'Support' -- 21:06, December 3, 2013 (UTC) *'Support' - Mainly because of organization, this would help tremendously. 22:32, December 3, 2013 (UTC) *'Support' - ' ArrowTwoActual'Talk 22:36, December 3, 2013 (UTC) *'Vehement Oppose' - I've worked on several wikis who've adopted the message wall and I think I can say safely that they're not worth it. One, it doesn't always work -- I sometimes get messages elsewhere and it fucks up on different parts of the network, incorrectly displaying count or not informing me of a new message at all. Furthermore, you get only 20 "messages" before it autoarchives -- why on earth would you want automatic archiving, for one? And for another thing, 20 is a pretty arbitrary limit. I no longer expect to get several messages in a day, but when I was at the height of my editing I might get 10, 20 messages per day. With this it would archive in less than a day, and that's just idiotic. It is also not difficult to maintain "organization" with the old method. Юра15px|link=User talk:YuriKaslov 22:47, December 3, 2013 (UTC) :*'Oppose' - I retract my original vote based on Yuri's input and reasoning. 22:56, December 3, 2013 (UTC) *'Oppose' - Same as PLR. ' ArrowTwoActual'Talk 23:00, December 3, 2013 (UTC) ::It seems Yuri is an influential man... - 23:07, December 3, 2013 (UTC) There appears there is no consensus for this, so I'm dropping the proposal. - 17:40, December 7, 2013 (UTC) Article Comments Like forums and user talk pages, current article talk pages require each page to be edited to take part in a discussion. A new, optional feature from Wikia is the comments system - which is very similar in layout to blog comments, with the ability to post and directly reply to wikicoded comments. This is the default for new wikis. Making use of this feature should massively boost participation in article discussions and make the business of running the site smoother. If these new comments are adopted, old-style talk pages will be automatically archived - still visible but no longer editable. All other talk pages (eg. File talk: or Battlefield Wiki talk:) will remain unaltered - 21:00, December 3, 2013 (UTC) ---- *'Support' adoption of article comments. I personally think this is a good idea and will boost the ability to have discussions. - 21:00, December 3, 2013 (UTC) *'Support' -- 21:06, December 3, 2013 (UTC) *'Oppose' - I feel that comments are too accessible for Anons/irresponsible users to leave messages like "omg this gun is totes OP!!1!", etc. Mainspace talk pages do their job of legitimate questions about the article, how it should be changed, whether to rename, and so on. While I support changes forums and usertalk, I feel the current talkpages serve their purpose better than socialnetwork-esque commenting. Just my thoughts. 22:21, December 3, 2013 (UTC) ::That is a valid concern and could take a lot of effort to police if this is implemented. It's certainly something to bear in mind, although it could perhaps be tested with a trial before-hand. Thanks for your input - 22:27, December 3, 2013 (UTC) *'Oppose' - Per Arrow, talk pages should be used for anything benefitting the article. A comment system in place of what we have now would make it seem like its intended for users to post their opinions regarding the subject of the main article, which seems... well, not beneficial. 22:32, December 3, 2013 (UTC) I have been persuaded to agree with ArrowTwoActual and PLR that this probably will be more trouble than help. I am withdrawing the vote for this section of the debate - 22:42, December 3, 2013 (UTC) }}